F.M. Dostoevsky and S.N. Bulgakov's book Philosophy of Economy

Philosophy of Economy (1912) is of particular importance in the spiritual and ideological development of the Russian religious philosopher S.N. Bulgakov who passed a difficult way ''from Marxism to idealism'', and then - to priesthood. Bulgakov experienced the philosophical school of Marxism and its economic perspective, and delivered his own approach to ''economy'' - an approach from positions of religious philosophy, sophiology. Philosophy of economy by Bulgakov is both the person's labour in harmony with the nature, the land, which the person is connected with by prayer bows and kissing; and the person's management of the nature people corrupted and killed. The philosopher connects the second way of management, ''land corruption'', with Marxism, with ''economic materialism'' of Karl Marx. Bulgakov develops this key problem of the book in a number of other works: Main Problems of the Theory of Progress (1902), Vasnetsov, Dostoevsky, Vl. Soloviev, Tolstoy (Parallels) (1902), Karl Marx as Religious Type (1906), The Nature in Philosophy ofVl. Soloviev (1910), etc. In all these works the philosopher addresses to F.M. Dostoevsky's heritage, in particular, to the novel The Brothers Karamazov perspective, to the images of Ivan and Alyosha Karamazovs. Bulgakov perceives works of the writer as truly sophiological. In Philosophy of Economy Dostoevsky's texts are crucial; in particular, Bulgakov's book begins and ends with quotes from Dostoevsky. According to the philosopher, it is Dostoevsky's word only that can totally ''express pathos and aspiration'' of his work. The image of Alyosha Karamazov in the book of the philosopher is connected with the sophiological issue of harmony of the terrestrial and the heavenly. Bulgakov turns to the culmination moment of the spiritual evolution of Alyosha - to the act of kissing of the earth by the precept of the Elder Zosima. The image of Ivan Karamazov in Bulgakov's perception is connected, first of all, with the revolt issue. The philosopher does not interpret it in the aspect of theodicy as Dostoevsky had it, but, first of all, as the revolt against the world drawn and described by Karl Marx, the world of economic materialism and socialism. As a whole, Dostoevsky's sophiological heritage is updated in Bulgakov's book to be opposed to the economic materialism of Karl Marx.

Keywords

Authors

References